My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
DRMS Comment Objection Intake - DEV 3/31/2025 (59)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M1977410
>
DRMS Comment Objection Intake - DEV 3/31/2025 (59)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/1/2025 10:28:05 PM
Creation date
3/31/2025 11:24:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977410
IBM Index Class Name
Application Correspondence
Doc Date
3/31/2025
Doc Name
Comment/Objection
From
Serah Giarrusso
To
DRMS
Email Name
JPL
JPL
JPL
JPL
Media Type
D
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Comment/Objection Narrative* <br /> I do not support the expansion of the Cross Caribou Mines and the proposed reopening of this mine.There <br /> historical water violations since the passing of Tom Hendricks is well documented.These water violations <br /> happened while the mine was not even in production. <br /> There has not been one town meeting to discuss with the town this proposed expansion. <br /> Their application does not show how the mine will control water pollution during the mining operation and in the <br /> long-term, post-mining. Given the history of water pollution problems,a more detailed analysis of how the mine <br /> is going to ensure future water quality protection is required under state law. <br /> Their application does not show that the current treatment and monitoring systems in place or as proposed will <br /> adequately protect ground and surface water during active mining.Additionally,who is testing their water? Is it <br /> an independent 3rd party? <br /> Their application does not show sufficient detail as to the plans for the ore material to be mined, including where <br /> the ore from the mine will be processed, how it will be transported,and how it will be stored on site.There is no <br /> transportation or storage plan in this application. <br /> Their application lacks a detailed description of the area surface hydrology to enable the public to understand <br /> all of the drainages and bodies of water that might be affected by the mining operation. It's not just this area that <br /> would be affected, but evaporating water will affect air quality for all creatures near and far. <br /> Their application discusses a milling operation on site, but does not provide sufficient information for review of <br /> the impacts or reclamation requirements of a milling operation on site. <br /> Their application must incorporate all aspects of the reclamation plan in the proposed financial assurance <br /> (bond)for full reclamation. <br /> Their application does not discuss the risk of wildfire ignition(from explosives used and stored on site,or sparks <br /> from equipment)despite the mine being located in the highest risk level in the state for wildfire probability, <br /> severity and post fire impacts. <br /> Their application does not provide sufficient information to ensure protection of the property and environment <br /> from wildfire,flood, blackout or high winds. <br /> Permitting Action Comment/Objection is Regarding <br /> New Permit • Change to Existing Permit <br /> Permit Number* (?) <br /> Enter a valid permit number <br /> M1977410 <br /> Revision Type and Sequence* <br /> Increasing permit area from 9.99 to 200 <br /> County* <br /> Colorado County where the proposed operation is located <br /> Boulder <br /> Enter one county only <br /> Site Name <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.